Comparative toxicity of three differently shaped carbon nanomaterials on Daphnia magna: does a shape effect exist?

Abstract

The acute toxicity of three differently shaped carbon nanomaterials (CNMs) was studied on Daphnia magna, comparing the induced effects and looking for the toxic mechanisms. We used carbon nano-powder (CNP), with almost spherical primary particle morphology, multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs), tubes of multi-graphitic sheets, and cubic-shaped carbon nanoparticles (CNCs), for which no ecotoxicological data are available so far. Daphnids were exposed to six suspensions (1, 2, 5, 10, 20 and 50 mg L⁻¹) of each CNM, and then microscopically analyzed. Ultrastructural analyses evidenced cellular uptake of nanoparticle in CNP and CNT exposed groups, but not in samples exposed to CNCs. Despite this difference, very similar effects were observed in tissues exposed to the three used CNMs: empty spaces between cells, cell detachment from the basal lamina, many lamellar bodies and autophagy vacuoles. These pathological figures were qualitatively similar among the three groups, but they differed in frequency and severity. CNCs caused the most severe effects, such as partial or complete dissolution of the brush border and thinning of the digestive epithelium. Being the cubic shape not allowed to be internalized into cells, but more effective than others in determining physical damages, we can conclude that shape is an important factor for driving nanoparticle uptake by cells and for determining the acute toxicological endpoints. Shape also plays a key role in determining the kind and the severity of pathologies, which are linked to the physical interactions of CNMs with the exposed tissues.

Keywords:

• Nanotoxicology
• carbon nanoparticles
• carbon nanocubes
• carbon nanotubes
• microscopy

Acknowledgements

Authors wish to thank Dr. M. Ascagni, Università degli Studi di Milano for her help in the use of the ImageJ® software, and Prof. G. Melone, Università degli Studi di Milano, for his helpful advices.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.